XP Back-up Utility
Ed H
It is it a reliable backup? Is my data safe to be recovered (assuming I back
up to a safe place?)
If the file is too big, will the utility span multiple DVD's?
--
Ed H
Dell Dimension 4550, WinXP Home SP2
60 Gig. HD, 512 DDR, Pentium IV 2.40 GHz.
Bob I
Ed H wrote:
> Regarding Win XP Back-up Utility.
> It is it a reliable backup? Is my data safe to be recovered (assuming I back
> up to a safe place?)
>
> If the file is too big, will the utility span multiple DVD's?
The utility won't write to removable media. Your DVD writing software
will have to be used to place the backup file on DVD.
Patrick Keenan
news:uD0mzWgt...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Regarding Win XP Back-up Utility.
> It is it a reliable backup? Is my data safe to be recovered (assuming I
> back up to a safe place?)
Some people find it reliable, others do not.
>
> If the file is too big, will the utility span multiple DVD's?
No, it can't write to DVD or CDs at all, let alone span them.
There are better backup apps available. many in the $50 range.
HTH
-pk
PD43
>"Ed H" <w.wh...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>news:uD0mzWgt...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Regarding Win XP Back-up Utility.
>> It is it a reliable backup? Is my data safe to be recovered (assuming I
>> back up to a safe place?)
>
>Some people find it reliable, others do not.
>
>>
>> If the file is too big, will the utility span multiple DVD's?
>
>No, it can't write to DVD or CDs at all, let alone span them.
>
>There are better backup apps available. many in the $50 range.
Acronis True Image Home: $35 at Newegg.
Big Al
Teneo
If want to backup up whole system then external USB hard drive is
advisable... make sure you format it with NTFS as by default they are
usually FAT32 and this will not allow backup file above 4GB
"PD43" <paul...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:p9nm24dnuv9ko21kj...@4ax.com...
Unknown
http://www.symantec.com/norton/products/overview.jsp?pcid=br&pvid=ghost12
True Image (has a 15 day trial version also)
http://www.acronis.com/homecomputing/products/trueimage/
JS
"Ed H" <w.wh...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:uD0mzWgt...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
Bill in Co.
> If you want to backup small <=4Gb then a DVD with relevant software is
> ok.
> If want to backup up whole system then external USB hard drive is
> advisable... make sure you format it with NTFS as by default they are
> usually FAT32 and this will not allow backup file above 4GB
WHO has a FILE > 4 GB? (ok, perhaps a few video camera geeks).
As for the partition size, even with FAT32 it certainly CAN be much larger
than 4 GB.
Anonymous
"Bill in Co." <not_rea...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:O9JD4Ik...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Teneo wrote:
>> If you want to backup small <=4Gb then a DVD with relevant software is
>> ok.
>> If want to backup up whole system then external USB hard drive is
>> advisable... make sure you format it with NTFS as by default they are
>> usually FAT32 and this will not allow backup file above 4GB
>
> WHO has a FILE > 4 GB? (ok, perhaps a few video camera geeks).
> As for the partition size, even with FAT32 it certainly CAN be much larger
> than 4 GB.
>
>
It's not that anyone has a single >4GB file, it's the technique
that the backup uses to store the backup image.
As example, ntbackup stores the backup image as one large
single file, where the components comprising the backup are
combined. Try running this on a fat architecture and it won't
be long before you'll see the 4GB limitation.
Conversely, CMS' Bounce Back backup software stores the
backup image in native file format, meaning that the backup
is an exact image of the backed up components. No doubt
this technique is retained just to avoid limitations on fat arch-
itected systems.
Thanks.
Bill in Co.
> "Bill in Co." <not_rea...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:O9JD4Ik...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Teneo wrote:
>>> If you want to backup small <=4Gb then a DVD with relevant software is
>>> ok.
>>> If want to backup up whole system then external USB hard drive is
>>> advisable... make sure you format it with NTFS as by default they are
>>> usually FAT32 and this will not allow backup file above 4GB
>>
>> WHO has a FILE > 4 GB? (ok, perhaps a few video camera geeks).
>> As for the partition size, even with FAT32 it certainly CAN be much
>> larger
>> than 4 GB.
>>
>
>
> It's not that anyone has a single >4GB file, it's the technique
> that the backup uses to store the backup image.
>
> As example, ntbackup stores the backup image as one large
> single file, where the components comprising the backup are
> combined. Try running this on a fat architecture and it won't
> be long before you'll see the 4GB limitation.
Good catch. It would be interesting to see just how TI manages to backup
an image on Win98SE (FAT32) systems.
One possibility is that TI breaks the image up into smaller segments, just
as some video programs have to do IF they can run on FAT32 (meaning Win9x
apps), since no single file using FAT32 can ever be larger than 4 GB....
UNLESS it is possible by some other proprietary means, as you seem to be
suggesting below. But THAT would require a special NON FAT32 partition on
the HD,that would be invisible and unaccessible to Win9x).
Nonny
<not_rea...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>Good catch. It would be interesting to see just how TI manages to backup
>an image on Win98SE (FAT32) systems.
>
>One possibility is that TI breaks the image up into smaller segments, just
>as some video programs have to do IF they can run on FAT32 (meaning Win9x
>apps), since no single file using FAT32 can ever be larger than 4 GB....
That's exactly what it does, because it has no choice. Same
thing with Ghost.
Anonymous
I really don't know how/if TI, Ghost, et al handles such a
limitation that's present in a fat architecture system. I sus-
pect(aka guess) they're really not designed for use on
those systems at all.
I don't really see much reason for a vendor to consider
an operational compatability on an "out of service" system.
See my last(5/15) post in:
http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.public.windowsxp.general/browse_frm/thread/99e22a784daf187b?hl=en#
Thanks.
Bill in Co.
I see. The other possibility I mentioned might not even be possible for a
Win9x system, no matter how proprietary the image file format is - unless
one booted up into some special proprietary operating system boot disk JUST
to make (or restore) the backup image (without windows being involved,
whatsoever), which seems pretty far out.
Bill in Co.
Some of them will work with these systems.
> I don't really see much reason for a vendor to consider
> an operational compatability on an "out of service" system.
Well, but it's not really "out of service", in that there are plenty of
people still using such systems. And fortunately some of these programs
still work for those users. And since someone made a comment on a 4 GB
size limitation, I wanted to clarify that.
PD43
>> Good catch. It would be interesting to see just how TI manages to
>> backup an image on Win98SE (FAT32) systems.
>>
>> One possibility is that TI breaks the image up into smaller segments, just
>> as some video programs have to do IF they can run on FAT32 (meaning Win9x
>> apps), since no single file using FAT32 can ever be larger than 4 GB....
>>
>> UNLESS it is possible by some other proprietary means, as you seem to be
>> suggesting below. But THAT would require a special NON FAT32 partition
>> on the HD,that would be invisible and unaccessible to Win9x).
>>
>
>I really don't know how/if TI, Ghost, et al handles such a
>limitation that's present in a fat architecture system. I sus-
>pect(aka guess) they're really not designed for use on
>those systems at all.
>
>I don't really see much reason for a vendor to consider
>an operational compatability on an "out of service" system.
They have no problem with such a system. Why cut yourself off from a
large customer base: not everyone uses NTSF.
From the Acronis site:
Supported File Systems
• FAT16/32, NTFS, Linux Ext2/Ext3, ReiserFS, Linux Swap
Ed H
gigs saying it must be formatted to NTFS to be more than 4 gigs.
--
Ed H
Dell Dimension 4550, WinXP Home SP2
60 Gig. HD, 512 DDR, Pentium IV 2.40 GHz.
"Bill in Co." <not_rea...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:O9JD4Ik...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
Bill in Co.
some FAT32 partitions (20 GB and 40 GB each, respectively).
As I said, you CAN have > 4 GB for FAT32 PARTITIONS (and most commonly will
these days), but you CANNOT have any single FILE > 4GB, using FAT32.
If the program you are using won't allow you to create a FAT32 PARTITION
greater than 4 GB, that is a limitation of the program you are using.
PD43
>No it can't. I tried to create one to my new external HD and it stopped at 4
>gigs saying it must be formatted to NTFS to be more than 4 gigs.
Bill gets confused sometimes. He's kinda new to all this FAT32 vs
NTFS stuff.
JCO
you can have it set to create what ever size you want. So if your running
Fat 32, you just set it to create images less than that (limitation of the
Operating System). Converting FAT 32 to NTFS is a piece of cake, very
reliable and recommended. I keep my images on a second harddrive that is in
a cradle. I just turn on the extra harddrive whenever I do my backups.
DVD's are okay too.
"Ed H" <w.wh...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:eJZL0hs...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
Bill in Co.
Thanks in advance.
Ken Blake, MVP
wrote:
> Converting FAT 32 to NTFS is a piece of cake, very
> reliable and recommended.
Regarding that conversion: To do it right, it's not quite as simple as
you may think. To convert to NTFS, you use the CONVERT command. But
first read http://www.aumha.org/a/ntfscvt.htm because there's an issue
regarding cluster size that isn't obvious.
Also note that conversion is a big step, affecting everything on your
drive. When you take such a big step, no matter how unlikely, it is
always possible that something could go wrong. For that reason, it's
prudent to make sure you have a backup of anything you can't afford to
lose before beginning.
--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience
Please Reply to the Newsgroup
JCO
backup. Having said that, I've done it more than 20 times and never had an
issue. Therefore, very simple and reliable. The convert command works and
Partition Magic is even better.
"Ken Blake, MVP" <kbl...@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote in message
news:bvcp24tn3da58c7kt...@4ax.com...